FlushingVsNotFlushing & Chlorophyll Breakdown (Help a fellow Newbie/wanabie Gromie)

curious2garden said:
I know why. Placebo (snake oil) sales is the palliative cure of the ignorant. Luckily I don't really care as I am a breeder and not a seller.


You would have loved Pol Pot
Click to expand...
As a breeder you should care the most

To stay on track though I just wanted to play devil's advocate. Felt bad for the dude who removed his avatar.
I'm too stoned for this
 
Last edited:
Alter Jean said:
I mean... Opinions are opinions. Numbers are numbers...

There is a bit about something it goes ' Men lie, women lie, numbers dont' '

So who is being hard headed here?
Click to expand...
Precisely there are a ton of stupid people that can be swindled away from their hard earned money because of advertising. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it is good.

Science is about proving a hypothesis. Science isn't sold it's funded. Anyway you do you.
 
curious2garden said:
Precisely there are a ton of stupid people that can swindled away from their hard earned money because of advertising. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it is good.

Science is about proving a hypothesis. Science isn't sold it's funded. Anyway you do you.
Click to expand...

I appreciate that. There is no swindling though because the quality is there.

I am curious if there is an science experiment out there that tests the flowers under combustion; and measures / compares the rate of combustion rather than fertilizer content in dead plant tissue
 
Alter Jean said:
I appreciate that. There is no swindling though because the quality is there.
Click to expand...
Prove it, objectively.
Alter Jean said:
I am curious if there is an science experiment out there that tests the flowers under combustion; and measures / compares the rate of combustion rather than fertilizer content in dead plant tissue
Click to expand...

So are you saying that there's some accelerant in some cannabis and not others? I'm f'n howling here.
 
curious2garden said:
Prove it, objectively.


So are you saying that there's some accelerant in some cannabis and not others? I'm f'n howling here.
Click to expand...

How about instead, you prove the opposite objectively? I know and can tell by your posts that you have been growing for a long time. So you can tell me about the side by side comparisons? It is kind of funny when people say it... Almost a denial of sorts... When they have truly ran it.

"Statistical analysis determined that personal preferences did not influence taste test outcomes (data not shown). "

That bit is pretty funny there also. From your paper on the nutrient company.

What I am suggesting is that maybe you're wrong about quality in relation to the 'feeding to the end' zombie apocalypses.
This is the good things about science is that it can always be proven wrong/ right
 
Alter Jean said:
How about instead, you prove the opposite objectively? I know and can tell by your posts that you have been growing for a long time. So you can tell me about the side by side comparisons? It is kind of funny when people say it... Almost a denial of sorts... When they have truly ran it.

"Statistical analysis determined that personal preferences did not influence taste test outcomes (data not shown). "

That bit is pretty funny there also. From your paper on the nutrient company.

What I am suggesting is that maybe you're wrong about quality in relation to the 'feeding to the end' zombie apocalypses.
This is the good things about science is that it can always be proven wrong/ right
Click to expand...
Nope burden of proof is on you. How about you do it and stop trolling
 
Alter Jean said:
I appreciate that. There is no swindling though because the quality is there.

I am curious if there is an science experiment out there that tests the flowers under combustion; and measures / compares the rate of combustion rather than fertilizer content in dead plant tissue
Click to expand...
Why would anyone care about rates of combustion? Tell me please what possible conclusions you could draw from that exercise?
 
Singlemalt said:
Why would anyone care about rates of combustion? Tell me please what possible conclusions you could draw from that exercise?
Click to expand...
I mean.. People be lighting the weed on fire to smoke it...

"The combustion of tobacco results in the formation of smoke (that contains a range of chemical constituents), heat, and ash. The high heat associated with combustion leads to the thermal breakdown of the tobacco when it is burned, resulting in the production of many of the toxicants found in cigarette smoke."

I guess what I meant to say was about the smoke not dead plant tissue
 
Alter Jean said:
I am curious if there is an science experiment out there that tests the flowers under combustion; and measures / compares the rate of combustion rather than fertilizer content in dead plant tissue
Click to expand...

Umm question.....how stoned at you from a scale from 1 to 10?.........jc
 
Alter Jean said:
I mean.. People be lighting the weed on fire to smoke it...

"The combustion of tobacco results in the formation of smoke (that contains a range of chemical constituents), heat, and ash. The high heat associated with combustion leads to the thermal breakdown of the tobacco when it is burned, resulting in the production of many of the toxicants found in cigarette smoke."
Click to expand...
Keep it moist.... it burns slow, dry it out... it burns fast. What more do you want to know?
 
Singlemalt said:
Ok and you would relate variances in combustion to mineral content?
Click to expand...
No I would be curious to find out if they appear in different forms under combustion// free radicals causing flavor changes or curing changes. I suppose 'rate of' was dumb... Don't care about the speed of the bun - My bad
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top